Perceptions of Relational Practices in the Workplace

Abstract

We examined the intersection of gender and work through an investigation of relationally motivated behaviour in the workplace. Using Fletcher's ethnography of women's relational practices in a masculine work environment as a springboard, we examined Fletcher's typology of relational practice, participants' perceptions of employees who perform these forms of behaviour and whether these perceptions were related to gender. Working adults (N = 128) completed online surveys containing workplace scenarios and rated how effective and submissive they perceived the behaviour to be. Overall, participants rated relational practices as ineffective and submissive, regardless of whether a man or a woman had performed them. However, they reported that they would behave the same way as the target and they offered relationally oriented reasons for their choice. Relational practices remain paradoxical in the workplace, both necessary and devalued.

‘I wouldn’t say it’s sexism, except that … It’s all these little subtle things’: Healthcare scientists’ accounts of gender in healthcare science laboratories

“…Her exclusion is in line with the proposal from Carlson and Crawford (2011) that women are excluded because they act in a relational way viewed as ineffective. This senior woman thought that she acted with integrity and inclusiveness but her male boss excluded her; her phrase about her boss ‘not work[ing] in the same way as I do’ possibly indicated his rejection of her difference.…”

“…This woman realized that challenging her boss was counterproductive, so she coped by being ‘submissive’ and not questioning his requests. Her submissiveness in turn might be interpreted by her boss as a relational characteristic that was ineffective in practice (Carlson and Crawford, 2011). This may well have meant, then, that she was not given the roles that would assist her in her development as a scientist but instead was encouraged to take on the support roles that kept her in a subordinate position.…”

“…Thus, as Fletcher (2001) describes, when women manifest ‘empathy, vulnerability and connection’ (p. 9), they are regarded as too caring or relational. Carlson and Crawford (2011) go a stage further and suggest that relational practices are regarded as ‘ineffective’ (p. 371) whether they are performed by women or by men; such practices are rarely rewarded and are even actively discouraged by both sexes partly because they do not have the language to describe them in ways acceptable in organizational life (p. 363). We suggest that assessing women as caring and therefore ineffective provides a rationale for women to be excluded from decision-making groups.…”

Symbolic Interactions and the Development of Women Leaders in Higher Education

“…Consequently the aping of male leaders was met with disapproval. Carlson and Crawford's () research led them to suggest women who are perceived as taking on a ‘masculine style of management’ do not ‘ensure their success because it creates a double‐bind situation: if women do not act according to stereotypes of femininity, it may cause a backlash, decreasing their standing in the organization even more’ (p. 361).…”

“…However, as Smith () and Christman and McClellan (, p. 3) argued ‘gender identity and leadership are more complex than to simply fit them into one gender construction model or another’. They and others recognized that expansive and restrictive workplace practices impact positively or negatively on women receiving vertical promotions (Bird, ; Bruckmüller and Branscombe, ; Carlson and Crawford, ; Christman and McClellan, ; Dominici et al ., ; Eagly, ; Ellström et al ., ; Fuller and Unwin, ; Gustavsson and Fogelberg Eriksson, ; Leathwood, ; Paechter, ; Risman, ).…”